Michael Walsh of National Review Online called for the termination of women’s right to vote last week:

Nevertheless, you’re on to something I’ve been advocating for years now. And that is the repeal of all four of the so-called “Progressive Era” amendments, including the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th, which were passed between 1911 and 1920.

One of those has already been repealed—the 18th amendment, which ushered in Prohibition—which Walsh admits. That’s not really what he’s on about anyway:

The income-tax amendment was a self-evident attack on capitalism and led to the explosive growth of the federal government we currently enjoy today. (Without it, there’d be no need for a Balanced Budget Amendment.) Direct elections of senators has given us, among other wonders, the elevation of John F. Kerry to, now, secretary of state. Prohibition was directly responsible for the rise of organized crime and itsunholy alliance with the big-city Democratic machines. And women’s suffrage . . . well, let’s just observe that without it Barack Obama could never have become president. Time for the ladies to take one for the team.

I suppose we’re supposed to imagine it’s a “joke”, because he takes a jovial tone for the last one. But if so, it doesn’t make sense. He’s dead fucking serious about the other two—three, really, because he only seems to be against Prohibition because he believes it gave Democrats a leg up, which is one of those deaf-to-historical-change moments that lead Republicans to imagine that Lincoln would have anything to do with the modern version of their party—so, as a joke, it falls completely apart. If he hadn’t rolled it up with the other amendments initially, the “joke” defense he clearly has in his pocket would be an easier sell. Something like, “I’ve long advocated for the repeal of 3 of the Progressive Amendments (though one has already been repealed), and hey, ladies, sometimes you make me wish to repeal all four.” It would still be a misogynist joke, but easier to sell as a joke, even if not a very funny one.

As it stands, it’s clear he’s doing what Al Franken calls “kidding on the square“, where you say something you mean but pretend it’s a joke so you don’t have to take responsibility for it. Franken has some fun with it in his books, calling himself out for it and therefore turning a typically unfunny bit of passive-aggression into a for-real joke, but I’m guessing you all know that because of course you’ve read his books. Kidding on the square is a favorite tool of sexists, who want to say sexist things, but are too cowardly to say them directly. Walsh is just a particularly obvious example. And no, none of the other National Review bloggers argued with him on this point.

1. Hard to argue with any of this

That's pretty deplorable. Basically Walsh doesn't like democracy because it's not giving him what he wants. I sympathize (I remember Bush being elected twice and my current governor Rick Scott won an election as well), but don't think that's a good enough reason to give up democracy.

12. Naw, make 'em sufferage with the rest of us! ;)

7. "ladies, take one for the team"?? first, I am no lady. second, the power structure in this country

is NOT my team, so, no, I have no plans to "take one for the team"

he can pretend he is joking all he wants, but he is not the first person to actually talk about repealing the 19th. the fact that people think they can actually say bs like this is worrisome, actually. (echoes of "the handmaid's tale", anyone?)

8. Actually, Ann Coulter and Barbara Olson

(the wife of Bush-era U.S. Solicitor (the attorney who argues for the government before the SOTUS) Ted Olson, who died on the D.C. plane that hit the Pentagon on 9/11) were together arguing for just that back in 2000, saying that women hadn't done anything good with the "generous gift they'd been given" and that all the bad stuff us terrible Dems have been responsible for in the 20th century was largely their fault for largely voting for Dems. Their thinking was that since us gals hadn't done right by such a "gift", (i.e., done what THEY wanted) then it should be taken away from us. That was chilling enough, but the fact that they were women made it even worse.

Sometimes I have to check the calendar to make sure it really is 2013.

15. Maybe next week he'll urge reinstituting slavery

16. I say let's repeal the voting rights of RWNJs

It's simple. All you have to do is require that voters have to have an emotional age of 18 to vote, so that would make teabagger misogynists ineligible. They're too young to vote, anyhow--at least emotionally.

19. Republican democracy: You don't like the way people vote, take away their right to it. n/t

20. Tearing up 100 years of progress is the definition of reactionary.

It's time to call them what they are - they aren't conservatives anymore, they are full-blown retrograde reactionary. And that's scary. And I would add that if they get to repeal everything back to the 16th Amendment, it's only a matter of time before they'll start wanting to repeal the 13th, 14th and 15th...